Posted by Luckysha on 26 July 2012 | Filed under dawn news
Shafqat Mehmood, Salman Raja in Target Point – 26th July 2012
VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
please wait...
Rating: 0.0/10 (0 votes cast)
875313 Commentshttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.zemtv.com%2F2012%2F07%2F26%2Ftarget-point-kya-pakistan-ke-saray-maslay-khatam-hogae-hain-26th-july-2012%2FTarget+Point+%28Kya+Pakistan+ke+saray+Maslay+Khatam+hogae+hain%3F%29+%E2%80%93+26th+July+20122012-07-26+15%3A58%3A42Luckyshahttp%3A%2F%2Fwww.zemtv.com%2F%3Fp%3D87531Leave your comment
well done Ch manzoor now time has come ppp should play on front foot to save democratic system from this judicary who trying to tapile elected govet and trying to send pakistan once again in dark era.Mr zafar ali shah need his blood pressure pills with cold water.there is no logic in shafkat,s arguments but just bugs-e zardari.In Next election people of pakistan will say once again*GAYA BHUTTO*Asma for u how was ur last trip to England with Mr gilliani.
Cheater Chowdery Sahib, stop fu'cing lying, Your time of robbery is almost diminished. In the mean time you need bail out money so Go and sell chickens and milk, chowderies are better in this field, only dummies can vote for you in the future.
However, in view of the judicial turmoil currently prevailing in Pakistan because of some highly controversial orders passed by the Pakistan Supreme Court, particularly the order ousting the Prime Minister, a clear elaborate enunciation of the philosophy of judicial restraint is called for. This in my opinion is necessary because it is evident that the Pakistan Supreme Court, particularly its Chief Justice, have for some time embarked on a perilous path of confrontation with the political authorities, for reasons best known to themselves, which can only have disastrous consequences, not only for the judiciary but also for the entire country.
In a recent statement, the Chief Justice has said that it is the Constitution, not Parliament, which is supreme in the country. There is no controversy about this legal position, and indeed that is the settled law since the historical decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Marbury vs. Madison (1803).
The grave problem, however, which Courts are often faced with is this: on the one hand there is no doubt that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and prevails over statutes and executive decisions, and it is for the Courts to interpret the Constitution, on the other hand, in the garb of interpretation, the Court must not seek an unnecessary confrontation with the legislature, particularly since the legislature consists of representatives democratically elected by the people.
The solution to the problem was provided in the classical essay written in1893 (and published in the Harvard Law Review the same year) by Prof. James Bradley Thayer, the then Professor of law of Harvard University entitled 'The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law'. This essay elaborately discusses the doctrine of judicial restraint and explains why Courts should follow it.
well done Ch manzoor now time has come ppp should play on front foot to save democratic system from this judicary who trying to tapile elected govet and trying to send pakistan once again in dark era.Mr zafar ali shah need his blood pressure pills with cold water.there is no logic in shafkat,s arguments but just bugs-e zardari.In Next election people of pakistan will say once again*GAYA BHUTTO*Asma for u how was ur last trip to England with Mr gilliani.
Cheater Chowdery Sahib, stop fu'cing lying, Your time of robbery is almost diminished. In the mean time you need bail out money so Go and sell chickens and milk, chowderies are better in this field, only dummies can vote for you in the future.
Views of Justice Katju
However, in view of the judicial turmoil currently prevailing in Pakistan because of some highly controversial orders passed by the Pakistan Supreme Court, particularly the order ousting the Prime Minister, a clear elaborate enunciation of the philosophy of judicial restraint is called for. This in my opinion is necessary because it is evident that the Pakistan Supreme Court, particularly its Chief Justice, have for some time embarked on a perilous path of confrontation with the political authorities, for reasons best known to themselves, which can only have disastrous consequences, not only for the judiciary but also for the entire country.
In a recent statement, the Chief Justice has said that it is the Constitution, not Parliament, which is supreme in the country. There is no controversy about this legal position, and indeed that is the settled law since the historical decision of the U.S. Supreme Court in Marbury vs. Madison (1803).
The grave problem, however, which Courts are often faced with is this: on the one hand there is no doubt that the Constitution is the supreme law of the land and prevails over statutes and executive decisions, and it is for the Courts to interpret the Constitution, on the other hand, in the garb of interpretation, the Court must not seek an unnecessary confrontation with the legislature, particularly since the legislature consists of representatives democratically elected by the people.
The solution to the problem was provided in the classical essay written in1893 (and published in the Harvard Law Review the same year) by Prof. James Bradley Thayer, the then Professor of law of Harvard University entitled 'The Origin and Scope of the American Doctrine of Constitutional Law'. This essay elaborately discusses the doctrine of judicial restraint and explains why Courts should follow it.